Recent content by TheRatmeister

I believe I was talking about merging street service from Hyde Square into the Huntington Ave subway there? Correct me if I'm wrong. There's a pretty big gap in the service levels between the two cases, and also a big difference in the actual switching going on. If an underground Mission Park...

Wasn't this basically just the 2003 UR Rail proposal? The route was slightly different but I'd argue the concept really wasn't.

Good points above. I will just say that I think Park Inner to Nubian (or Huntington) service is highly dependent on how the seaport connection is done. If you go from Bay Village to Seaport via Lincoln St or Hudson St, not only does I think that make the connection less likely, but also...

My personal favorite. That likely requires some amount of shuffling Albany routes over to Southampton assuming SL4/5 don't run anymore, but that's probably doable at least. One maybe possible way to get more yard space at Albany would be to stick some tail tracks under 93. You've got to work...

In my opinion this is completely the wrong way to look at free fares. Free fares should be used as an operational tool, not an equity tool. From the routes that I've looked at in the past, the ones which get 2/3 or more of their ridership from Rapid Transit stops are: 16 21* 22 32 34/34E 69*...

I mean, you could maybe connect it up to Cabot Yard with Track 61. Obviously Cabot would need new facilities for the new vehicles though, so I don't think it improves the value proposition very much.

And quite frankly it doesn't take a genius to see why. I'm really not sure why they thought it would be getting more than 3000 boardings?!?! That would put it on a similar level to Salem, or almost three times the ridership of Worcester. Like, how many drugs were involved in that projection?

On Essex: I could be wrong, but for just the tunneled sections, this shouldn't be a problem. Especially if they're stacked, you have more than enough horizontal clearance to avoid any building basements or foundations, as long as they aren't under the street itself. It's when you get to...

I highly, highly doubt it. Copley is right under the Public Library, Trinity Church, and the Old South Church. Expanding it in any way is very likely to be politically, financially, and/or technically infeasible. The only way to do quad-track would be to close the station, and I don't think it...

I'm going to focus in on this section, how does this compare to the other alternatives? Charles St Subway This is basically entirely unavoidable if you want the full 80 TPH if you're feeding anything other than Kenmore trains into the inner tracks at Park St. Without it you need to somehow...

Alternative Criss Cross: 32 TPH between Kenmore and Seaport, 16 TPH from Nubian to Park St Inner, and 32 TPH from Huntington to Government Center.

I think it could work, but you'd need to redirect most Soldiers Field traffic onto Leo Birmingham with a new junction there. At that point you could also take back 2 lanes from Soldiers Field between Arsenal St and N. Beacon St.

For those curious, here is the formula you can use for calculating the minimum distance BEMUs are viable. It's not perfect but it generally takes into account the main factors driving BEMU costs. No I'm not very good at choosing letters and it's confusing, apologies.

It depends on the rolling stock costs, but it's actually probably not. Removing the cost of charging stations and the need to have trains wait at terminals for charging makes a huge impact for costs. Using that $15m per mile number, and assuming a future where we want 15 minute service on both...

At about $15m per mile that's not completely unreasonable at least. Still more than double the NEC electrification costs though. Also, I would argue this is a good, arguably textbook place to do battery electrification, stringing catenary up to Beverly then running on battery to the branches...